Grind schools are reportedly booming, drawing growing numbers of teenagers from mainstream schools. Participation in private tuition, or grinds, has also grown over time, although increasingly taking the form of online classes rather than the traditional individual or small group in-person format.
While I have published research on the role and impact of grinds in the lives of young people, there is little evidence on how students fare in grind school settings. During nearly 30 years in educational research, I have been in the privileged position of visiting school communities the length and breadth of the country. I have yet to set foot inside a grind school.
In reflecting on the Irish education system in a period of change and disruption post-Covid-19, it has never been clearer that schools are central in Ireland’s efforts to integrate an increasingly multicultural population, build an inclusive society for disabled people and tackle persistent socioeconomic inequality. In assessing the second-level school system, it is timely that we examine how grind schools contribute to broader societal, as well as individual, goals.
My research consistently points to the importance of social connectedness within and beyond the school community in fostering student development and wellbeing. Participation in sports and cultural activities and active participation in school-organised after-school and lunchtime activities are central to student belonging and engagement. One recent study highlights that the commitment of schools to the holistic development of students as part of a school community is more important than ever.
Schools are not just places where young people learn testable subject matter, they are a dense web of educational experiences and social relations where children are shaped into adults. While designed to focus on exam preparation, it is fair to ask: how well does the grind school offering compare on this critical issue?
A second, and equally important issue, relates to access and exclusion. While we have scant evidence on the characteristics and profile of students enrolling in grind schools or on their motivation for doing so, we do have evidence on which students access grinds. The evidence shows grinds are an educational resource that is socially stratified, accessible to the better-off. The presence of a high-stakes competitive examination system is shaping family spending. Students and their parents see private tuition as a way to increase their prospects of entering higher education and prestigious fields of study; it is seen as a worthwhile investment.
Interestingly, the evidence also shows that students with additional needs are more likely to enrol in grinds, suggesting their learning needs may not be fully met in mainstream classrooms. The school social mix effects are also notable – young people attending schools with a high concentration of students from lower socio-economic backgrounds are less likely to participate in grinds. The growing numbers participating is likely to be fuelling pressure on families who simply can’t afford to enrol. Of course, all of this is in the absence of any clear effect of grinds on student grades and exam preparedness.
Not all parents can participate in the process of “choice”, and family resources have an impact on individual capacity to choose.
Overall, the evidence points to some key priorities for second-level education that may serve to counter the apparent drift towards grinds and, more notably, grind schools.
1. Reforms need to reduce the incentive towards rote learning, to provide a more flexible, student-centred model, to ensure greater alignment with the revamped junior cycle and to ensure Level 1 and Level 2 senior cycle progression modules are implemented promptly.
2. Schools should no longer be forced to rely on the volunteerism of teachers to provide varied and vital extracurricular programmes. Greater resources and better facilities to support extracurricular provision across all schools is key.
3. There is a need for comprehensive resourcing of teacher professional development provision to ensure all teachers are fully prepared to teach in increasingly diverse classrooms, are competent in using digital technologies effectively and are able to respond to curricular reforms.
4. A huge challenge facing schools in disadvantaged areas is the far greater complexity of need among their students: for instance, a much higher share with learning or emotional-behavioural difficulties. While they receive additional funding, they are also less likely to ask for or receive voluntary contributions from parents. It is welcome to hear that a school funding formula weighted more heavily towards those in the most disadvantaged areas, a possible “Deis-plus” category, is under consideration by the Department of Education.
The concept of school choice is embedded in the Irish education system since the establishment of the Irish State and protected by the Constitution. But not all parents can participate in the process of “choice”, and family resources have an impact on individual capacity to choose.
If the priorities listed above are addressed, and all schools are resourced to meet student need in its broadest sense, I wonder what advantage, if any, the grind school model would offer.
Prof Selina McCoy is associate research professor in social research and joint education research coordinator at the ESRI, and adjunct professor at Trinity College Dublin
